Showing posts with label helper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label helper. Show all posts

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Detecting the sObject type of Id's from ambiguous fields

When dealing with the OwnerId field, it is important to check if it is a User or a Group sObject you are dealing with before you start using it or you'll get errors. The Task object also has a few ambiguous fields that match up multiple Objects like the WhoId and the WhatId. In triggers and in other logic you will sometimes need to detect what the object is to either exclude or include it in the next bit of code. We dont want to iterate through code and update records if we don't need to, it will bog down the system. 


I have seen some of the ways out there that are used, particularly the one where you check if the first 3 letters of the ID is '500' or '300' but i do not think this is an accurate way of detection. I want one that the system tells me for sure what object it is. Unfortunately its not as dynamic as i would like it to be due to limitations in APEX, but it is still a much better detection than the above. 


I first made a helper class called GlobalHelper_IsSobjectType and populated it with a few methods that look like the following. It takes in the Id and after a check to make sure that an Id was actually passed and is not null, it try's to create an Object of that Type. If it can it will not fall into the Catch and will return true, other wise it will error and return false, but it will not error in a way that will halt your program from finishing(thus why its in a try catch). 




I made one for Account, Contact, Lead, User, and Opportunity since those are the ones I typically have to detect. When it comes to the OwnerId field I can just use the one for User since if it returns false i know its a group. I also found that I needed to Overload the method so it would work with string as well as Id: 




Ideally I was hoping to make the above but make it more dynamic so you pass the object type you wanted to detect as well as the id for the detecting. That way you would only need one method instead of one for each Object, but I have yet to find a way to make it work. Now of course you need to test the code, and I prefer as close to 100% coverage as possible so:






Questions?  
Twitter: @SalesForceGirl  or Facebook


Tuesday, May 31, 2011

What makes Elegant Code?

One of the things i love about programming is that there is always several different ways to accomplish a task. If you gave 10 programmers the same task, each would go about it in there own way, sure the result would be the same but the code will be completely unique.

I find that when i look at other programmers code, its almost like looking at an artist work, not to say that the code is a work of art, just unique and sometimes beautiful. Every programmer has there own way of doing things, tendencies that all make up the big picture of the code. The naming convention used, structure of the methods and even the way they went about accomplishing the task. It all contributes to the look and feel of the code. It also can show the skill of the programmer or artist, or lack there of. 

Code should be simplistic, elegant, beautiful. It should also be structured, and still 'flow' like a picture. So many times i look at code and often think of spaghetti, and cringe at the over complication of something that should only be one or two lines and not ten. And please don't get me wrong, i am always trying to learn new ways to improve my code, trying to find smarter ways to go about a problem, keeping an open mind to new ideas and concepts.

An example of what i mean, below is two lines, both of the same SOQL statement, both get the job done. But one, while not wrong, also isn't quite right.

Contact[] objContact = [select id, name from Contact where email ='someemail@email.com' limit 1];

Contact objContact = [select id, name from Contact where email = :sInEmail limit 1];

In the first SOQL statement, it is creating a list of Contacts even though the query is only returning one. It also has a 'hard-coded' variable which is never a good practice.  In the second, since we are only querying for one obj, it only creates a single object, also it uses a variable instead of string text. 

Now i know what you may be thinking, does that really make a difference in the elegance of the code? Yes. If we left it as the first statement, where it is returning a List of objs instead of a single obj, and all the proceeding methods would then have to accommodate for it, even thought it isn't necessary. Its like adding lines and logic that only complicate and so the code tends to look messy or clustered when it doesn't need to be. Keeping code simplistic is key. As a rule of thumb, I try to keep my methods under 10 lines total, and that includes all the curly brackets.

Here is another example of doing things different ways while still accomplishing the same task:

      public string mystring;

      public string getMystring()
      {
            return mystring;
      }

      public void setMyString(string s)
      {
            this.s = mystring;
      }

vs

          public string sInStringName{get;set;}

I hope I don't need to explain why the second is cleaner, but if you notice i use the variable name of 'sInStringName' instead of 'mystring', i do this for most variable's: 'lst' for list, 'obj' for sObjects, etc. this helps me identify what it is, along with what type. So if i am looking for a string, i know it will start with 's'. I also like to follow the camel hump approach where the first word in the name is lowercase and all words after have the first letter capitalized. When it comes to booleans i am still trying to decide if i like 'b' as in 'bInBoolean' or 'is' since it is a true false statement, which would look like 'isBoolean'. Its important that no matter what naming convention you choose, that you stick with it, for the whole project, if you don't like it, try tweaking it in the next project.

Questions? 

Twitter: @SalesForceGirl  or Facebook

Friday, March 18, 2011

Global Helper Classes - Top 5 Methods to Include

Check for Null Value
Its always important to check for null, and since the check for null is the same over and over, it should be a Helper method. Since salesforce doesn't have a generic type variable that covers all like JS does with the type 'var' or C# does with the Type 'T'. Sure they have sObject, so we can do generic objects, but nothing that covers everything like strings, Lists etc. So in my Helper class I overloaded the method for each 'type' I need to check for null in. As you can see they are essentially the same method just checking a different type of variable.
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECKS IF STRING IS NULL OR EMPTY
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInValueToCheck">STRING TO CHECK</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF NOT NULL</returns>
public static boolean CheckForNotNull(string sInValueToCheck)
{
      if(sInValueToCheck != null && sInValueToCheck != '' && sInValueToCheck.toLowerCase() != 'null')
      {
            return true;
      }
      return false;
}
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECKS IF SOBJECT LIST IS NULL OR EMPTY
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lstInValueToCheck">STRING TO CHECK</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF NOT NULL</returns>
public static boolean CheckForNotNull(List<sobject> lstInValueToCheck)
{
      if(lstInValueToCheck != null && lstInValueToCheck.size() > 0)
      {
            return true;
      }
      return false;
}

Get Param
I cant tell you how many times i need to get a param from the page, so it just made scene to include it here. As you should all know, when using params you should always reduce the case to lower and trim the param to ensure that when you go to compare it to what the value should be, it is always able to be matched up. But, Salesforce Id's are case-sensitive, so I created two Methods, one to reduce the case to lower, and a normal one. I couldn't overload the method since each has the same signature, plus this makes it obvious which one is the toLower() one. Another method i have, but am not showing here, isUrlParamOrDefault(string sInUrlKey, string sInDefualt), this enables you to always return a value instead of null.... well except of course if the sInDefault isn't null.
/// <summary>
/// GETS THE PARAM VALUE BASED ON KEY FROM URL
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInUrlKey">URL PARAM KEY</param>
/// <returns>PARAM VALUE TO LOWER</returns>
public static string UrlParamToLower(string sInUrlKey)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInUrlKey))
      {
            String UrlParam = ApexPages.currentPage().getParameters().get(sInUrlKey);
            if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(UrlParam))
            {
                  UrlParam = UrlParam.toLowerCase().trim();
            }
            return UrlParam;
      }
      return null;
}

/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// GETS THE PARAM VALUE BASED ON KEY FROM URL
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInUrlKey">URL PARAM KEY</param>
/// <returns>PARAM VALUE</returns>
public static string UrlParam(string sInUrlKey)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInUrlKey))
      {
            return ApexPages.currentPage().getParameters().get(sInUrlKey);
      }
      return null;
}

Check Value
Its always important to not only check for null, but to also make sure its the value you expect. So with these methods your able to check to see if the value passed is the same as the string passed, or if it is in the List that was passed. 
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECK URL PARAM AGAINST LIST TO ENSURE IT IS WHAT IT SHOULD BE
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInUrl">URL PARAM</param>
/// <param name="lstInValueToCompare">LIST TO COMPARE VALUE AGAINST</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF CORRECT VALUE ELSE FALSE</returns>
public static boolean CheckValue(string sInUrl, List<string> lstInValueToCompare)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(lstInValueToCompare))
      {
            for(string s : lstInValueToCompare)
            {
                  if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInUrl))
                  {
                        if(sInUrl.toLowerCase().trim() == s.toLowerCase().trim())
                        {
                              return true;
                        }
                  }
            }
      }
      return false;
}
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECK URL PARAM AGAINST STRING TO ENSURE IT IS WHAT IT SHOULD BE
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInUrl">URL PARAM</param>
/// <param name="sInToCompare">VALUE TO COMPARE AGAINST</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF CORRECT VALUE ELSE FALSE</returns>
public static boolean CheckValue(string sInUrl, string sInToCompare)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInUrl))
      {
            if(sInUrl.toLowerCase().trim() == sInToCompare.toLowerCase().trim())
            {
                  return true;
            }
      }
      return false;
}

Comparison (de-dupe)
When creating lists, its important to de-dupe to ensure uniqueness(if thats what is called for in your list). What these methods do is to check the current value passed against the list you want to add it to, ensuring that the passed value inst in the list. Honestly this is used constantly in my code to ensure the list doesn't contain duplicate values.
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECKS IF STRING IS IN LIST
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInCurrentValue">STRING TO CHECK</param>
/// <param name="lstInCollectionValue">LIST TO COMPARE VALUE TO</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF IN LIST</returns>
public static boolean ContainsItem(String sInCurrentValue, List<String> lstInCollectionValue)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(lstInCollectionValue))
      {
            for(String s: lstInCollectionValue)
            {
                  if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInCurrentValue))
                  {
                        if(sInCurrentValue.toLowerCase().trim() == s.toLowerCase().trim())
                        {
                              return true;
                        }
                  }
            }
      }
      return false;
}
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECKS IF SOBJECT IS IN LIST
/// </summary>
/// <param name="objInCurrent">SOBJECT TO CHECK</param>
/// <param name="lstInCollection">LIST TO COMPARE VALUE TO</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF IN LIST</returns>
public static boolean ContainsItem(sobject objInCurrent, List<sobject> lstInCollection)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(lstInCollection))
      {
            for(sobject s: lstInCollection)
            {
                  if(s != null && objInCurrent != null)
                  {     
                        string sId = s.Id;
                        string cId = objInCurrent.id;
                        if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(cId) && GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sId))
                        {
                              if(sId.toLowerCase().trim() == cId.toLowerCase().trim())
                              {
                                    return true;
                              }
                        }
                  }
            }
      }
      return false;
}

Add items to list
The Comparison methods would be used in something like the following method, which would return the completed list of items, de-duped. These methods allow you to either create a List<String> of Id's, or a List<sObject>, but it ensures that the list will be 'cleaned out' since it is using the Helper method of 'ContainsItem'
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// ADDS SOBJECT IDS TO STRING LIST AFTER DEDUPING
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lstInSobjectValue">LIST TO GET VALUES FROM</param>
/// <returns>STRING LIST OF SOBJECT IDS</returns>
public static List<String> AddItemsToIdList(List<sobject> lstInSobjectValue)
{
      List<String> idList = new List<string>();
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(lstInSobjectValue))
      {
            for(sobject obj: lstInSobjectValue)
            {
                  if(obj != null)
                  {
                        if(!GlobalHelper.ContainsItem(obj.id, idList))
                        {
                              idList.add(obj.Id);
                        }
                  }
            }
            return idList;
      }
      return null;
}
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// ADDS SOBJECT TO LIST AFTER DEDUPING
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lstInsObjectItems">LIST TO GET VALUES FROM</param>
/// <returns>SOBJECT LIST</returns>
public static List<sObject> AddItemsToList(List<sObject> lstInsObjectItems)
{
      List<sObject> newList = new List<sObject>();
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(lstInsObjectItems))
      {
            for(sObject con : lstInsObjectItems)
            {     
                  if(con != null)
                  {
                        if(!GlobalHelper.ContainsItem(con, newList))
                        {
                              newList.Add(con);
                        }
                  }
            }
            return newList;         
      }
      return null;
}

Questions? 
Twitter: @SalesForceGirl  or Facebook

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Helper Classes, What are they?


Helper classes are made up of all static methods/variables that are designed to be both generic and dynamic, so they can be used over and over again without having to rewrite the code. It is considered a best practice for most programming languages, but I will be showing you examples in Apex.

Example:
This may be a familiar line of code that is littered all over your classes:
if(myString != null && myString  != '')
{
/// DO SOME THING
}

While that isn't wrong, the phrase "Code smarter not harder" come to mind, so instead of the above line everywhere, create a helper Class and add a method like this:
/// <summary>
/// CHECKS IF STRING IS NULL OR EMPTY
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInValueToCheck">STRING TO CHECK</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF NOT NULL</returns>
public static boolean CheckForNotNull(string sInValueToCheck)
{
     if(sInValueToCheck != null && sInValueToCheck != '' && sInValueToCheck.toLowerCase() != 'null')
     {
          return true;
     }
     return false;
}

Then back to your code, you would use something like the following:
if(HelperClassName.CheckForNotNull(myString))
{
/// DO SOME THING
}

And yes, you could keep the method in the same class and not create a new one, but it will look a lot cleaner in its own class, plus some other reasons, but the point is: PUT ALL HELPER METHODS IN THEIR OWN CLASS!!


Helper methods generally fall into two classifications, Global and not. Non Global helpers are on the class or project level, and are made of methods that are more task specific, ie designed specifically for the current project / class at hand. For instance, for my ContactCreation class I needed to check if the last-name was passed, and if not use the email address. Since the method is specif for this project, and i wont likely be needing it anywhere else, it wont be a Global helper, I would make a class called ContactCreationHelpers and add it to that.

Example:
/// <summary>
/// DETERMINES IF LAST NAME EXISTS AND CAPITALIZES THE FIRST LETTER OR RETURNS EMAIL
/// </summary>
/// <param name="sInLastName">CONTACT LAST NAME</param>
/// <param name="sInUrlKey">CONTACT EMAIL</param>
/// <returns>LAST NAME OR EMAIL</returns>
public static string findLastNameOrEmail(string sInLastName, string sInEmail)
{
      if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInEmail))
      {
            if(GlobalHelper.CheckForNotNull(sInLastName))
            {
                  return GlobalHelper.CapitalizeFirstLetter(sInLastName);
            }
            return sInEmail;
      }
      return null;
}

Where as Global helpers are much more generic and the methods that belong to them have to meet a much stricter standard, so its kind of like the 'Cool kids club' of Classes.  The CheckForNotNull method above would be a perfect candidate for the Global Helper Class, and it can be overloaded to cover checking other types like Lists or objects. 
Example:
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECKS IF SOBJECT LIST IS NULL OR EMPTY
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lstInValueToCheck">STRING TO CHECK</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF NOT NULL</returns>
public static boolean CheckForNotNull(List<sobject> lstInValueToCheck)
{
      if(lstInValueToCheck != null && lstInValueToCheck.size() > 0)
      {
            return true;
      }
      return false;
}
/// <summary>
/// OVERLOADED
/// CHECKS IF STRING LIST IS NULL OR EMPTY
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lstInValueToCheck">STRING TO CHECK</param>
/// <returns>TRUE IF NOT NULL</returns>
public static boolean CheckForNotNull(List<String> lstInValueToCheck)
{
      if(lstInValueToCheck != null && lstInValueToCheck.size() > 0)
      {
            return true;
      }
      return false;
}

I wont get into depth about what overloaded means but as you can see all three(including the one at the top) have the same method name, and yes the all live in the same Class. But because the signature is different, meaning the types of variables being passed to the method (string, List<string>, List<sobject>) are different, the program knows to use correct one based on what is passed. So now checking for null is even easier since its the same HelperClassName.CheckForNotNull(myVariable) every time, no matter what you need to check. 


When making or updating these helper classes its important to be VERY selective in what you decide to make a 'helper' method, and even more so when it comes to Global helpers. You want to also make sure that before you start using those classes/methods in your code that they are EXACTLY what you need them to be, test code has already been written and all points of failure have been covered. Their should be NO updating, other than to add new or overloaded methods, since doing so would potentially brake any number of classes that may be using it.  


Remember,  code smarter not harder.


Questions? 
Twitter: @SalesForceGirl  or Facebook